Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

The Darkest Hour Film

1246

Comments

  • JWADDICK said:

    http://www.bombsight.org/explore/greater-london/

    40000 people killed in London alone through bombing , 20 x 9 Eleven death toll.

    And your point is ?
    9 Eleven gets a lot of fuss and coverage, and rightly so , but bigger events have taken place that don't get the same treatment, but have had a bigger impact.
    More than a million civilians were killed in the siege of Leningrad (25 x the London blitz) plus 1.5m soldiers but we give it very little attention in the UK.

    We're just pre-disposed to be more interested in events that happened within our own sphere. The blitz is really important to the British but it's a pretty minor event in the overall history of WW2. Dunkirk and the Battle of Britain by contrast were significant.

  • JWADDICK said:

    http://www.bombsight.org/explore/greater-london/

    40000 people killed in London alone through bombing , 20 x 9 Eleven death toll.

    And your point is ?
    9 Eleven gets a lot of fuss and coverage, and rightly so , but bigger events have taken place that don't get the same treatment, but have had a bigger impact.
    Apples to oranges. The Blitz was a result of two countries being at war over several year and German civilians living in their cities and major industrial towns also had huge death tolls. London also was also less badly affected than many cities on mainland Europe and in the Pacific Theater that were directly involved in land battles and invasions, as well as civilians targeted for ethnic or social cleansing or as part of terror campaigns.

    9/11 was a devastating peacetime terrorist attack in comparison to other modern terror attacks that is cited as the spark that ignited the war on terror which has arguably had long term consequences including the deaths of thousands if not millions as the Middle East rapidly destabilized as the West used 9/11 as a casus belli to invade and interfere in the Middle East and the rise in extremist groups in the wake of hugely counterproductive Western interventions. The reverberations of 9/11 are still taking effect to this day on a geopolitical scale. The Blitz? Not so much.
  • edited February 7
    Jints said:

    History is a massive subject and schools can't cover everything. Dunkirk was a major and important event but only one of hundreds that could be taught.

    I read two or three history books about WW2 a year and I still come across major events that I knew nothing about.

    My top 3 WW2 events:

    Dunkirk
    Battle of Britain
    Normandy Landings

    in no particular order.
  • Fiiish said:

    JWADDICK said:

    http://www.bombsight.org/explore/greater-london/

    40000 people killed in London alone through bombing , 20 x 9 Eleven death toll.

    And your point is ?
    9 Eleven gets a lot of fuss and coverage, and rightly so , but bigger events have taken place that don't get the same treatment, but have had a bigger impact.
    Apples to oranges. The Blitz was a result of two countries being at war over several year and German civilians living in their cities and major industrial towns also had huge death tolls. London also was also less badly affected than many cities on mainland Europe and in the Pacific Theater that were directly involved in land battles and invasions, as well as civilians targeted for ethnic or social cleansing or as part of terror campaigns.

    9/11 was a devastating peacetime terrorist attack in comparison to other modern terror attacks that is cited as the spark that ignited the war on terror which has arguably had long term consequences including the deaths of thousands if not millions as the Middle East rapidly destabilized as the West used 9/11 as a casus belli to invade and interfere in the Middle East and the rise in extremist groups in the wake of hugely counterproductive Western interventions. The reverberations of 9/11 are still taking effect to this day on a geopolitical scale. The Blitz? Not so much.
    You're joking, why do you think i won't drive a german car! :-0

  • edited February 7
    This is a german war hero who died fighting the allies.



    I thought a man of this courage deserves a mention when discussing the war.

    I won't drive a german car either. The companies that exist today have blood on their hands.
  • I hope none of you drink Fanta either.
  • This is a german war hero who died fighting the allies.



    I thought a man of this courage deserves a mention when discussing the war.

    I won't drive a german car either. The companies that exist today have blood on their hands.

    You might not want to look too closely into the histories of some British institutions.

    Anyone who genuinely thinks of WW2 when they consider modern-day Germany needs to have a word with themselves.
  • edited February 7
    Fanta is a bit more complicated I think. My understanding is that Coca Cola detached itself from Germany during the war. It had factories and management in Germany and they created the brand Fanta. After the war, Coca Cola took back control of the factories and the brand.

    Whether you like Russell Brand or not, it is very striking how he exposed a company which chooses to ignore its past.

  • Sponsored links:


  • JamesSeed said:

    Jints said:

    History is a massive subject and schools can't cover everything. Dunkirk was a major and important event but only one of hundreds that could be taught.

    I read two or three history books about WW2 a year and I still come across major events that I knew nothing about.

    My top 3 WW2 events:

    Dunkirk
    Battle of Britain
    Normandy Landings

    in no particular order.
    Come on we always Top 5's on here! Let's have your Top Five WWII events, your Top 5 Terrorist Attacks and your Top 5 German products you boycott. Surely we should pull out of every World Cup, Euro's and stop our British clubs participating in European competitions if the bloody Germans are there!

    Seriously! Sometimes I really wonder about people these days.
  • edited February 7
    se9addick said:

    This is a german war hero who died fighting the allies.



    I thought a man of this courage deserves a mention when discussing the war.

    I won't drive a german car either. The companies that exist today have blood on their hands.

    You might not want to look too closely into the histories of some British institutions.

    Anyone who genuinely thinks of WW2 when they consider modern-day Germany needs to have a word with themselves.
    I don't disagree - we should look critically at everything. The length of time it took for these companies to apologise speaks volumes - BMW apologised for its crimes on its centenary. Everybody should know about the VW dying rooms. Why don't they?
  • edited February 7

    se9addick said:

    This is a german war hero who died fighting the allies.



    I thought a man of this courage deserves a mention when discussing the war.

    I won't drive a german car either. The companies that exist today have blood on their hands.

    You might not want to look too closely into the histories of some British institutions.

    Anyone who genuinely thinks of WW2 when they consider modern-day Germany needs to have a word with themselves.
    I don't disagree - we should look critically at everything. The length of time it took for these companies to apologise speaks volumes - BMW apologised for its crimes on its centenary. Everybody should know about the VW dying rooms. Why don't they?
    After World War 2 the Allies enacted a deNazification doctrine aimed at removing Nazi influences within Germany and making it clear to the surviving Germans the evils of the Nazi regime. I don't think it is fair to judge a company by an apology that happens 60 years after the fact because it is quite likely those that remained in control of such companies were cleared by the authorities as being either innocent of wrongdoing or being sufficiently penitent to remain in place. As such any apology or admission/judgement of guilt would have taken place very soon after.

    I also don't hold the opinion that companies, rather than people, are to be held responsible for such atrocities. A company is simply a legal structure and blaming the company seems to, in my eyes, absolve some of the responsibility of the people who were complicit in the atrocities.
  • se9addick said:

    This is a german war hero who died fighting the allies.



    I thought a man of this courage deserves a mention when discussing the war.

    I won't drive a german car either. The companies that exist today have blood on their hands.

    You might not want to look too closely into the histories of some British institutions.

    Anyone who genuinely thinks of WW2 when they consider modern-day Germany needs to have a word with themselves.
    Bit like folk calling the French surrender monkeys
  • ....Argies yes, French no
  • Fiiish said:

    se9addick said:

    This is a german war hero who died fighting the allies.



    I thought a man of this courage deserves a mention when discussing the war.

    I won't drive a german car either. The companies that exist today have blood on their hands.

    You might not want to look too closely into the histories of some British institutions.

    Anyone who genuinely thinks of WW2 when they consider modern-day Germany needs to have a word with themselves.
    I don't disagree - we should look critically at everything. The length of time it took for these companies to apologise speaks volumes - BMW apologised for its crimes on its centenary. Everybody should know about the VW dying rooms. Why don't they?
    After World War 2 the Allies enacted a deNazification doctrine aimed at removing Nazi influences within Germany and making it clear to the surviving Germans the evils of the Nazi regime. I don't think it is fair to judge a company by an apology that happens 60 years after the fact because it is quite likely those that remained in control of such companies were cleared by the authorities as being either innocent of wrongdoing or being sufficiently penitent to remain in place. As such any apology or admission/judgement of guilt would have taken place very soon after.

    I also don't hold the opinion that companies, rather than people, are to be held responsible for such atrocities. A company is simply a legal structure and blaming the company seems to, in my eyes, absolve some of the responsibility of the people who were complicit in the atrocities.
    I do understand your point - and I do not think that the companies have any Nazi links today. I am sure they don't. What disturbs me is that there has been a reluctance to be open about the past of the company for commercial reasons - even to supress it.
  • JamesSeed said:

    Jints said:

    History is a massive subject and schools can't cover everything. Dunkirk was a major and important event but only one of hundreds that could be taught.

    I read two or three history books about WW2 a year and I still come across major events that I knew nothing about.

    My top 3 WW2 events:

    Dunkirk
    Battle of Britain
    Normandy Landings

    in no particular order.
    WHAT? no room for Escape to Victory in your top three?
  • se9addick said:

    This is a german war hero who died fighting the allies.



    I thought a man of this courage deserves a mention when discussing the war.

    I won't drive a german car either. The companies that exist today have blood on their hands.

    You might not want to look too closely into the histories of some British institutions.

    Anyone who genuinely thinks of WW2 when they consider modern-day Germany needs to have a word with themselves.
    Bit like folk calling the French surrender monkeys
    Exactly mate, it should be cheese eating surrender monkeys
  • Fiiish said:

    se9addick said:

    This is a german war hero who died fighting the allies.



    I thought a man of this courage deserves a mention when discussing the war.

    I won't drive a german car either. The companies that exist today have blood on their hands.

    You might not want to look too closely into the histories of some British institutions.

    Anyone who genuinely thinks of WW2 when they consider modern-day Germany needs to have a word with themselves.
    I don't disagree - we should look critically at everything. The length of time it took for these companies to apologise speaks volumes - BMW apologised for its crimes on its centenary. Everybody should know about the VW dying rooms. Why don't they?
    After World War 2 the Allies enacted a deNazification doctrine aimed at removing Nazi influences within Germany and making it clear to the surviving Germans the evils of the Nazi regime. I don't think it is fair to judge a company by an apology that happens 60 years after the fact because it is quite likely those that remained in control of such companies were cleared by the authorities as being either innocent of wrongdoing or being sufficiently penitent to remain in place. As such any apology or admission/judgement of guilt would have taken place very soon after.

    I also don't hold the opinion that companies, rather than people, are to be held responsible for such atrocities. A company is simply a legal structure and blaming the company seems to, in my eyes, absolve some of the responsibility of the people who were complicit in the atrocities.
    I do understand your point - and I do not think that the companies have any Nazi links today. I am sure they don't. What disturbs me is that there has been a reluctance to be open about the past of the company for commercial reasons - even to supress it.
    Why do you say that? They did use the centenary as an opportunity to highlight their involvement. What else should they do?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Fiiish said:

    Fiiish said:

    se9addick said:

    This is a german war hero who died fighting the allies.



    I thought a man of this courage deserves a mention when discussing the war.

    I won't drive a german car either. The companies that exist today have blood on their hands.

    You might not want to look too closely into the histories of some British institutions.

    Anyone who genuinely thinks of WW2 when they consider modern-day Germany needs to have a word with themselves.
    I don't disagree - we should look critically at everything. The length of time it took for these companies to apologise speaks volumes - BMW apologised for its crimes on its centenary. Everybody should know about the VW dying rooms. Why don't they?
    After World War 2 the Allies enacted a deNazification doctrine aimed at removing Nazi influences within Germany and making it clear to the surviving Germans the evils of the Nazi regime. I don't think it is fair to judge a company by an apology that happens 60 years after the fact because it is quite likely those that remained in control of such companies were cleared by the authorities as being either innocent of wrongdoing or being sufficiently penitent to remain in place. As such any apology or admission/judgement of guilt would have taken place very soon after.

    I also don't hold the opinion that companies, rather than people, are to be held responsible for such atrocities. A company is simply a legal structure and blaming the company seems to, in my eyes, absolve some of the responsibility of the people who were complicit in the atrocities.
    I do understand your point - and I do not think that the companies have any Nazi links today. I am sure they don't. What disturbs me is that there has been a reluctance to be open about the past of the company for commercial reasons - even to supress it.
    Why do you say that? They did use the centenary as an opportunity to highlight their involvement. What else should they do?
    They did so under pressure and should have done sooner.
  • edited February 7
    I must have failed the history equivalent of the CL height test, despite being a full time military historian and having led many, many, veterans back to the 'old front lines' from both wars, I drive a German car, quite like Patrick Bauer and once whistled 99 Red Balloons.....
  • SE7toSG3 said:

    I must have failed the history equivalent of the CL height test, despite being a full time military historian and having led many, many, veterans back to the 'old front lines' from both wars, I drive a German car, quite like Patrick Bauer and once whistled 99 Red Balloons.....

    That's poor @SE7toSG3 I refuse to listen to German bands like Kraftwerk of Led Zeppelin on principal
  • Fiiish said:

    Fiiish said:

    se9addick said:

    This is a german war hero who died fighting the allies.



    I thought a man of this courage deserves a mention when discussing the war.

    I won't drive a german car either. The companies that exist today have blood on their hands.

    You might not want to look too closely into the histories of some British institutions.

    Anyone who genuinely thinks of WW2 when they consider modern-day Germany needs to have a word with themselves.
    I don't disagree - we should look critically at everything. The length of time it took for these companies to apologise speaks volumes - BMW apologised for its crimes on its centenary. Everybody should know about the VW dying rooms. Why don't they?
    After World War 2 the Allies enacted a deNazification doctrine aimed at removing Nazi influences within Germany and making it clear to the surviving Germans the evils of the Nazi regime. I don't think it is fair to judge a company by an apology that happens 60 years after the fact because it is quite likely those that remained in control of such companies were cleared by the authorities as being either innocent of wrongdoing or being sufficiently penitent to remain in place. As such any apology or admission/judgement of guilt would have taken place very soon after.

    I also don't hold the opinion that companies, rather than people, are to be held responsible for such atrocities. A company is simply a legal structure and blaming the company seems to, in my eyes, absolve some of the responsibility of the people who were complicit in the atrocities.
    I do understand your point - and I do not think that the companies have any Nazi links today. I am sure they don't. What disturbs me is that there has been a reluctance to be open about the past of the company for commercial reasons - even to supress it.
    Why do you say that? They did use the centenary as an opportunity to highlight their involvement. What else should they do?
    They did so under pressure and should have done sooner.
    You'd be hard pressed to find any German company present after the Nazis were defeated that weren't forced to face up to their involvement in any atrocities in the immediate aftermath. I don't understand how it is in any way productive to force companies to wear a millstone round their neck in perpetuity due to crimes that happened 60 years ago when anyone who could possibly been involved is surely dead?
  • edited February 7
    I'm not telling others they shouldn't - just why I don't. It isn't a test. My brother drives a german car, an Audi. They come to terms with their dark dealings during the war as late as 2014. Audi has accepted it had “moral responsibility” for the deaths of 4,500 slaves imprisoned in the Flossenburg concentration camp in Bavaria. These men and women died while being forced to work at an Auto Union labour camp in nearby Leitmeritz.

    The people who run the company today are not to blame, but I'm not driving a car with a swastica on it, even if it was built by nuns. So i'm not driving a car of a company responsible for thousands of deaths, however long ago. But that is my personal decision and I don't judge those that drive Audis. As I said, my brother and business partner does so.

    I don't dislike Germans, I liked 99 Red Baloons and Bauer is one of my favourite players.
  • I think that many Audi workers would be quite appalled at having their handiwork compared to a swastika car. And Audi wasn't responsible for those deaths; the Nazis who controlled Audi were responsible for those deaths. It is easy for Audi's CEO to claim the company has responsibility when he wasn't even born.

    It should also be noted that the original Audi was effectively disbanded at the end of World War 2 after being dismantled by the Soviets and the current company is for all intents and purposes effectively a new enterprise.
  • Seriously @MuttleyCAFC, where do you stop though?

    We're talking 75 years ago now. Where is the cut off point for all the historical injustices that have happened throughout human history?

    Perhaps the focus needs to be those areas where these injustices haven't changed and continue in the 21st century, like famine, slavery and curable diseases, rather than worry about the diabolical past that you can do nothing to alter.
  • edited February 7
    Where is the cut of point? You tell me what the rules are and we can all follow them. Or maybe it is for our own individual feelings.

    Read this:
    https://www.thelocal.de/20140526/audi-used-forced-labour-under-nazis-in-germany
    It dates from 2014 and talks of Audi removing the positive references of its founder Richard Bruhn who is directly linked to war atrocities.
    Then see this audi page from 2108!
    http://www.audipenfold.com.au/au_partner/p_au_31250/en/discover_audi/history/personalities/richard_bruhn.html

    I stop where the crimes of these company's past were denounced immediately after the war and not in this century. If everybody knows about it because the companies are open about it then it is fine. They have accepted their past and have moved on. But if you didn't know about their past, it may be because they don't want you to know.
  • Where is the cut of point? You tell me what the rules are and we can all follow them. Or maybe it is for our own individual feelings.

    Read this:
    https://www.thelocal.de/20140526/audi-used-forced-labour-under-nazis-in-germany
    It dates from 2014 and talks of Audi removing the positive references of its founder Richard Bruhn who is directly linked to war atrocities.
    Then see this audi page from 2108!
    http://www.audipenfold.com.au/au_partner/p_au_31250/en/discover_audi/history/personalities/richard_bruhn.html

    I stop where the crimes of these company's past were denounced immediately after the war and not in this century. If everybody knows about it because the companies are open about it then it is fine. They have accepted their past and have moved on. But if you didn't know about their past, it may be because they don't want you to know.

    I think you are reading far too much into this. The news story you link to indicates Audi did both the study into its history and removing the positive references to Bruhn of its own accord.

    The second link is just the website of an Audi dealership in Australia. They probably aren't even aware of that profile on there.

    I very much doubt Audi are trying to cover up any links it has to the Nazis. They certainly wouldn't release their own study into their past if they were.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!